Sep. 9, 2018
10:11 am JST

Sep. 9, 2018
02:15 pm JST

t didn't work anyway, that liberals are so obsessively fixated by this, but who cares what Trump did with a failed porn star 12 years ago?

Oh, I imagine Melania cares, as while she was home with their months old child, the Great Orange Adulterer was off having a tryst with a porn star. Kinda have to think Ivanka wouldn't be a big fan of that either. But hey, Trump's tagline is MAGA - Make Adultery Great Again.

And once again we get the irony of a Trump supporter saying that an event in Trump's history 12 years ago is nothing, yet Obama sitting in Pastor Wright's church is heresy forever. It's spelled H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y..

Sep. 10, 2018
07:35 am JST

Not praised but I think back then if he was able to get with hot women, good on him.

Have you done a 180 on that?

No

Oh, I imagine Melania cares, as while she was home with their months old child,

Yes, that is between her and her husband, not the public

And once again we get the irony of a Trump supporter saying that an event in Trump's history 12 years ago is nothing, yet Obama sitting in Pastor Wright's church is heresy forever. It's spelled H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y..

Sitting in a church in listening to the sermons of racist pastor it’s not the same as an adulterer. I’m not saying or discounting or even minimizing what happened, but it’s not the same thing, but as always nice try.

Sep. 10, 2018
09:41 pm JST

12 years ago a billionaire businessman has a one night tryst ( maybe ) with a hot porn star, and the media are only talking about it now because he's now the president and they hate him because he beat Hillary.

They're talking about it because Daniels went public with it a few months ago after realizing that the agreement, legally speaking, is a dud. A nondisclosure agreement is a powerful instrument only so long as the person whose silence has been bought actually believes it is legally binding.

There are many reasons why that dynamic might change: new legal advice given to the payee, or the payee may independently decide they've had enough and want to tell the truth - because after all, these agreements tend to revolve around things that are true (hence the desire to shut that person up).

Whichever way you cut it, an agreement like this, offered to or forced on Daniels to protect a candidate a few weeks away from a presidential election is news, and it will be reported. And when it was, Trump and Cohen completely mishandled it, and the media and public were treated to one comically unlikely story after another.

As this story reports, Cohen is now willing to drop the NDA: it has become very inconvenient both for him and Trump, with potential legal complications for both of them. That's news too, and needs to be reported in detail and in depth.

Sep. 9, 2018
11:31 am JST

It didn't work anyway, that liberals are so obsessively fixated by this, but who cares what Trump did with a failed porn star 12 years ago?

Quite a lot of people probably, but your bringing it up is just a hamfisted attempt to obfuscate.

The actual issue under discussion is the attempt to hush the matter up, not 12 years ago but in 2016, in the closing stages of an election race.

So the real issues here are: was the agreement enforceable? Was it legal? Who did it involve? Who made the payments? Does it violate campaign laws? Does it violate other laws?

This is so funny.

It is, because after suing Daniels, Cohen's career went down the crapper faster than any lawyer in history. He's discredited as a lawyer, he's under criminal investigation, he's pleaded guilty to crimes, and he's surrendered, not by choice, a vast amount of information to law enforcement.

And now he's even begging to be allowed to drop the NDA that he sued to enforce.

Sep. 9, 2018
02:42 pm JST

It didn't work anyway, that liberals are so obsessively fixated by this, but who cares what Trump did with a failed porn star 12 years ago? This is so funny. Liberals crack me up. Lol

You completely misunderstand why this is significant. I get that the "it was 12 years ago" nonsense is a conservative talking point to obfuscate the actual issue, but try to keep up.

As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, the issue is illegal campaign contributions. Whether any democrat has received an illegal campaign contribution has no bearing on Trump doing so because one crime doesn't excuse another, so save your breath on spewing that nonsense in an attempt to deflect.

Sep. 10, 2018
12:52 am JST

12 years ago a billionaire businessman has a one night tryst ( maybe ) with a hot porn star, and the media are only talking about it now because he's now the president and they hate him because he beat Hillary.

Sep. 10, 2018
03:07 pm JST

bass4funkToday 07:35 am JST

Not praised but I think back then if he was able to get with hot women, good on him.

Have you done a 180 on that?

No

360, 540, 720?

And once again we get the irony of a Trump supporter saying that an event in Trump's history 12 years ago is nothing, yet Obama sitting in Pastor Wright's church is heresy forever. It's spelled H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y..

Sitting in a church in listening to the sermons of racist pastor it’s not the same as an adulterer.

Quite right, one is being a good Christian, the other is a person doing something that is still considered a Crime in about 20 states.

I’m not saying or discounting or even minimizing what happened, but it’s not the same thing...,